About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
've done something about it, but then i just complying with the tax code he created. how could clinton get away with claiming that the republicans were the ones who deregulated and created the real estate and financial problems when he repealed glass-steagall in 1899. that was the underpinning, and away, of of the whole problem. i would say it's a cheap wine or two because in 10 short years, all the big banks, almost all of them another. i just wonder how he can get away with that and i was one of the hallmarks that give a bump at bill clinton's speech. does he just not want to admit it? or does he know that people will care or following research this? how does it make a statement in front of everyone? >> host: maria bartiromo. >> guest: we are in political season, right? it's all politics and so, you know, number one on the tax code, yes, that is what i just said. i agree with that. because a scene change over the last three years of her going to complain about people not paying their fair share, change the tax code. it is all legal. if a money manager can use whatever loopholes to lower
,000 a year, that we should go back to the race we had when bill clinton was president, when we created 22 million jobs, what from deficit to surplus and created a whole created a lot of millionaires to boot. the reason this is important is because they doing that we can not only reduce the deficit. we can not only encourage job growth of small businesses, but were also to make investments necessary in education or in energy. and we do have a difference when it comes to definitions of small business. under my plan, 97% of small businesses would not see their income taxes go up. governor romney says well, those top 3% of the job creators they burdened. under governor romney's definition, as a whole bunch of millionaires and billionaires who are small-business. donald trump is a small business. i know donald trump doesn't like to think of himself as small anything, but that is how you define small businesses after getting small-business income. that kind of approach i believe will not grow our economy because the only way to pay for without either burdening the middle-class or blowing up our
. certainly people say gosh, bill clinton's security act was completed, but over the subsequent 20 years you did have a number of expansion after his boat in the medicaid program that the public rolling coverage has expanded dramatically. so i think it's very hard to see how you reversed the creation of the exchange and i think that it will evolve into a different system and something that conservatives and liberals will duke out over. i think it's going to make coverage absolutely essential to our politics. and so, then you're going to see a generation of republicans who would reconcile themselves to an basically talk about how to be fixated? fanuc investments or how much medicare would cost 30 years out when the program was created, they did not quite come true. in a way it is a lesson for republicans because in 1964 you had goldwater served as the nominee and the result of that was you had enormous democratic super majorities and you are able to see the creation of programs when you think about conservatives right now, fiscal conservatives are still wrestling with the legacy of medicare a
. we had a government shut down. newt gingrich i clinton. once the government shut down, the pressure on both sides was so intense there was a deal in less than three weeks. the pressure, if we go into january, will be far greater than it was then because the economic consequences and the market consequences are more significant. i think it's inconceivable that if we go into january, there won't be a settlement in january, early february at the latest. we hit the debt ceiling in february anyway. there has to be a settlement. somebody has to blink, probably both sides blink to some degree. i've talked a little bit to people in financial markets in new york about how they think the markets would react to all of this. the reaction i've got is there's a lot of nervousness, a lot of volatility in the markets in january. if there is a deal in a few weeks, and any deal clearly makes retroactive to january 1st, the tax cuts continued, and we'll remove sequesteration, then what i'm told is in the interim the damage really won't be that significant. now, for fiscal hawks, many of us have been s
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4